bivur wrote:I wonder if Estonians actually distinguish between long and overlong syllables in a casual or rapid speech? Or do they only distinguish between short and long syllables in a rapid speech and between all three lengths in a formal/slow speech?
As far as I know they are distinguished in all speech, whether rapid/casual or formal/slow. I can definitely hear the difference between long and overlong in a word like
linna, for example, no matter how quickly the word is said. There are many situations in which the meaning of the word is changed by the length, and although I suppose you could figure out the meaning from context (which is what you have to do in written Estonian anyway), in spoken Estonian the phonological difference is still usually or always heard.
Some examples:
kabi/kapi/kappishort kabi 'hoof' (nominative singular) / long kapi 'cabinet' (genitive singular) / overlong kappi ' cabinet' (partitive singular)
kalu/kaalu/kaalushort kalu 'fish' (partitive plural) / long kaalu 'weight' (genitive singular) / overlong kaalu 'weight' (partitive singular)
koli/kooli/koolishort koli 'trash' (nom/gen/part singular) / long kooli 'school' (genitive singular) / overlong kooli 'into the school' (illative singular)
lina/linna/linnashort lina 'flax' (nom/gen/part singular) / long linna 'town' (genitive singular) / overlong linna 'into the town' (illative/partitive singular)
löma/lööma/löömashort löma 'smashed ooze' (nom/gen/part singular) / long lööma 'fight, brawl' (genitive singular) / overlong lööma 'to hit' (infinitive verb)
nöbi/nööbi/nööpishort nöbi 'stubby' / long nööbi 'button' (genitive singular) / overlong nööpi 'button' (illative/partitive singular)
Whether or not the distinction is
always or just
usually audible, I can't really say (although I know there are studies out there where linguistics have measured length and if I remember correctly they've found that there is indeed a difference even in rapid speech). There are times when it's a bit difficult for me to tell if a syllable is long or overlong. I tend to blame this on my ears as a non-native listener, not on the speaker's pronunciation. As a native English-speaker my ears are not accustomed to listening for differences in length to distinguish meaning. (This is especially true when the syllable involves an overlong vowel sound. Overlong consonant sounds are easier for me to distinguish from long consonants.)
I think that not distinguishing between them in speech would be considered a foreign accent rather than "casual" speech.
I like Ainurakne's comparison to the pronunciation of compound words. I've never seen it described that way before but it makes a lot of sense to me and fits with what I've heard.
Related to that, Robert Harms in his book
Estonian Grammar (which is more of an academic work focusing on phonology, rather than a typical grammar) describes the overlong syllables as having 'postposed stress'. In other words, he claims that overlong syllables have a 'secondary stress' on either the vowel or consonant following the vowel with primary stress. This view is not widely shared (and the idea of consonants carrying stress is rather unorthodox) and personally I doubt that this is a linguistically accurate way to describe it;
but I do think the fact that Harms perceived it this way helps a bit with understanding how the words are pronounced. I think Harms with his 'postposed stress' and Ainurakne's comment about compound words are essentially describing the same thing.... in words with overlong consonants there is a slight change, whether you call it a pause or a secondary stress or a stressed consonant, that is similar to the way a word with two semantic parts is pronounced.
bivur wrote:Also, is it true that in falling pitch is realised in overlong syllables and level pitch in short and long syllables? Other sources state that rising/falling pitch is realised in overlong syllables and rising pitch in long syllables. So it's a bit confusing...
With this one, I'm really not sure. I suspect that it depends on the speaker and that any given speaker might not be consistent with it either. To the best of my knowledge pitch isn't a significant distinguishing factor at the syllable level (unless maybe this distinction is something really, really subconscious).